Section 305 BNS: Theft in a dwelling house, or means of transportation or place of worship, etc.

Whoever commits theft-

  1. in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or used for the custody of property; or 
  2. of any means of transport used for the transport of goods or passengers; or 
  3. of any article or goods from any means of transport used for the transport of goods or passengers; or 
  4. of idol or icon in any place of worship; or 
  5. of any property of the Government or of a local authority, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Understanding the Section

To summarize, Section 305 prohibits thefts committed in any of the following situations:

  • Dwellings and places used for the purpose of living or for safekeeping property – Theft in a dwelling, tent or vessel being used for habitation or to keep property is covered in this section. These are spaces that are private and secure; therefore, any violation in these spaces is taken very seriously. 
  • Means of transport – Theft from a vehicle or methods of transport that are being used for either carriage of goods and arms or passengers. This includes theft from means of transport including, but not limited to, buses, trains, trucks, or ships. Whether it is a person who is travelling or someone who is transporting merchandise, they are both vulnerable to property loss when they are in transit; this section is there to protect them. 
  • Articles or merchandise in transit – This is theft of articles being carried in a means of transport, whether or not access is had to the means of transport, itself. 
  • Deities or idols – Theft from temples, mosques, lighthouses, or churches, etc., are particularly serious due to the spiritual and cultural significance. 
  • Thefts from municipality and government – Theft from public property or property owned by a local authority has severe penalties due to the impact on the people involved and the community and public ownership.

Essential Elements 

For an offence under Section 305 BNS to be established, the following elements must be proven:

  1. Theft – There must be a dishonest removal or taking of property belonging to another. 
  2. Location – The removal or taking must take place from one of the place types above: domicile, transport, religious place, or government property. 
  3. Mens Rea (Intention) – The act must be intentional and dishonest. There must be an intention to remove and taking of the property. An accidental taking or lawful possession is not what the legislature intended. 
  4. Knowledge – The offender must know that the property belongs to another, and that taking the property is unlawful. 

Punishment

The law has a maximum punishment of seven years of imprisonment to reflect the seriousness of theft in locations where a theft is at its most sensitive:

  • Imprisonment – Up to 7 years (rigorous or simple),
  • Fine – The offender is also liable to pay a fine, or 
  • Both imprisonment and fine.

The maximum period of imprisonment reflects the need to deter thefts from places where security, sanctity, or public trust is being breached.

Examples

  • Dwelling Theft: A burglar enters a home in the middle of the night and steals jewelry. This comes under Section 305(a). 
  • Transport Theft: A thief steals luggage from a train or bus. This comes under Sections 305(b) and (c).
  • Religious Theft: A person steals a statue of value from a temple/establishment of worship. Section 305(d) applies in this case.
  • Government Property Theft: The theft of municipal machinery or public municipal archives constitutes an offense under Section 305(e).

Judicial Context 

Section 305 of BNS is called a modern codified thinking, however, the courts have historically treated theft from sensitive environments as an aggravated theft for example:

  • State v. Ram Singh (1967) – In this case the court found that stealing from a private home was aggravated over stealing from an open market because of the breach of privacy and trust.
  • Temple Idol Theft Cases – In public temple idol theft cases the courts are severe and punish harshly to lessen public discontent and to recognize the cultural significance of the statue.
  • Public Property Theft – Cases of theft from government property are treated with great sensitivity and the courts recognize the importance of maintaining public calmness and confidence in administrative institutions.